Watching the world of east London politics

Interviewing the president of IFE

In March 2009, as Andrew Gilligan began researching the Channel 4 Dispatches documentary that was to appear a year later, I interviewed, independently, a few of the central characters who would later be central to that programme. Although I was to appear in the documentary, my interviews were not commissioned by Dispatches.

Below is a transcript of an interview with Mohammad Habibur Rahman, the then president of the Islamic Forum of Europe. Except for a couple of small sections I’ve omitted for legal reasons, it’s verbatim. There is a picture of Mr Rahman on the IFE website here (he’s the man reading a speech on the right of the stage at a 2006 Trafalgar Square rally against the Danish cartoons. He’s standing next to Anas Al Takriti, of the Muslim Association of Britain, and Daud Abdullah, of the Muslim Council of Britain).

TJ: You’re president of IFE, aren’t you?

HR: I am.

TJ: IFE has been in the news recently with Azad Ali and with a few other issues, but I also know there are many councillors [in Tower Hamlets] who say they are really worried about the direction IFE is taking in terms of what its purpose is, if it’s trying to direct the politics of Tower Hamlets at council level and also in other areas of Britain. Are you able to talk about that now?

HR: I’m in the middle of my lunch…but when you say lots of people are talking, who are these lots of people?

TJ: Well, I’m a journalist and I’m sure you will understand that I don’t divulge those sources.

HR: Well, it’s news to me. I don’t know what I can add if I don’t know what people are talking about.

TJ: What they’re saying is that IFE has an agenda to try and control politics within Tower Hamlets and in other areas of the country in terms of its religious agenda and its adherence to the Shariah.

HR: Based on what? Where are they making these assertions from? From our website, or things that we have been saying? Where are these things coming from? It’s all news to me.

TJ: They’re saying it from their own personal contacts and experience and from people within the politics of east London.

HR: Hmm, and what is it that you’re after?

TJ: Well, one of the things that they’re saying is that there’s a deliberate agenda by IFE to infiltrate the Labour party and that it already has done and also it is also very closely allied with people like Lutfur Rahman at Tower Hamlets council, that it’s helping to get its agenda through and money is then directed back through to various community groups that IFE is involved with or supports, and it helps direct a block vote when it comes to elections against MPs who don’t support IFE or against councillors who don’t support IFE.

HR: Hmm. I think it would be very useful if we met some time and talked about these things. We have a history of working with all kinds of politicians in the past history for several years now and I think if you look at the work of IFE, we are engaged in the community and we have been also encouraging people to participate in politics without being partisan. So to make claims that we are trying to direct or take control is all ludicrous. It’s important that we do fit in the community. It’s important for community empowerment that they participate the political process. In the past, there have been Muslims who have been saying that politics here and participating here and voting, all of these are disallowed or haram in Islam, and we’ve said exactly the opposite and that we need to engage, you need to participate, but we will never tell you who you should vote for; you should talk to individuals and see the agenda of the parties and see the agenda of the individuals and, according to your needs and requirements, you should go cast your vote. So we have been doing some very positive work over the last few years – several years in fact – and we have worked with the Labour party who have been there before in the sense that we’ve encouraged them to do things that would be helpful for the community. And this includes people like [Helal] Abbas and Michael Keith in the past, and so on and so forth. So to say that IFE has got an agenda, IFE has got an agenda as much as anybody else.

TJ: What is your agenda then, if you say that you have an agenda?

HR: Participate as citizens in this civic society and engage in the process.

TJ: Do you then have various groups and pet projects that you would like to see public money directed towards?

HR: Not necessarily, no. I don’t think we have any influence over that. Anybody who is doing the work, and I don’t have the statistics to say who Tower Hamlets are supporting, but there are lots of projects that are being supported and they should be supported.

TJ: You’re a national group as well, aren’t you? Can you just talk to me a little more about it? There maybe a lack of understanding on a lot of people’s parts…there’s not too much information on your web, for example.

HR: We are national in the sense that our office is obviously in Tower Hamlets, but we do have work in other cities where we try to engage with primarily young Bangladeshis, but not exclusively.

TJ: Why primarily Bangladeshis?

HR: That’s how it’s evolved. We don’t have an agenda to work only with Bangladeshis.

HR: Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin with IFE? Probably not, but he was around before that in some Islamic work. Dr Abdul Bari is the one who was the first president I believe.

TJ: I understand that Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin was one of the founders.

HR: I don’t know if he was one of the founders, but he was involved with organisations prior to that.

TJ: Is there a link between IFE and Jamaat e Islami in Bangladesh?

HR: No. No, there isn’t. Only in so far as Jamaat e Islami is an Islamic organisation in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka and others, and we also happen to be an Islamic organisation and Islam is the common ground.

TJ: Do you support Jamaat e Islami in Bangladesh?

HR: What does that mean?

TJ: Do you back them, do you support their views?

HR: Which views?

TJ: Well, you tell me what Jamaat e Islami in Bangladesh is trying to achieve.

HR: Jamaat e Islami is an Islamic organisation, they are a political party. They are trying to progress their, I suppose their Islamic agenda in Bangladesh.

TJ: Do you support that?

HR: Do we support their work in Bangladesh?

TJ: Yes.

HR: We support them working in Bangladesh, yes. But don’t quote me as someone who supports the work of Jamaat e Islami, but I’m more focused here in the UK.

TJ: But you just said you do support the work they do in Bangladesh..?

HR: We support anybody who does Islamic work, everywhere in the world. That doesn’t tie us in with Jamaat e Islami in the way that some people want to do and are keen to do.

TJ: But it’s the same thing though, surely, if you support the work they’re trying to do, then you’re supporting them, aren’t you?

HR: Well, no, because a lot of people attach a lot of stigma with this party and what I said to you is that you should quote me in saying that, that we support anybody who is working for Islam. But then if you attach all this stigma and there are people who say they’re a violent party and they’ve done this and they’ve done that, certainly we don’t support any of that, so I think that we have to be careful because there are a lot of people in the community who say, “Jamaat e Islami: they’re a radical organisation.” We have nothing to do with radicalism.

TJ: Is there a membership structure to IFE? Do people sign up? How does it work in that way?

HR: No, historically people haven’t. Anybody who has been attending our events and programmes and attaches themselves with us, they’ve just effectively became members. We are moving towards formalising these kind of things so people do sign up.

TJ: So at the moment, you don’t actually have members, it’s more a kind of group in which people support?

HR: I can’t produce paperwork to show that I am an official member of IFE. There is membership.

TJ: So is Lutfur Rahman, the council leader, is he a supporter of IFE?

HR: Don’t be ridiculous, you’ll have to ask him that!

TJ: How long have you been IFE president?

HR: Four years now.

TJ: Who else is on the management board? How does it work and what is the committee structure?

HR: IFE is an organisation and there are elected members who serve for a term.

HR: Who else? Well, it would be good for us to sit and talk. Are you just looking for names, we’ve got about 20 people who are managing the organisation

TJ: The other name that’s always mentioned is [Tower Hamlets council children’s services officer] Hira Islam.

HR: Hira? You see, I think someone is trying to push an agenda with you.

TJ: Well, that might well be the case, but that’s why I’m coming to you to talk to you about it.

HR: Hira Islam is part of IFE, of course he is, but he is also very involved with the Labour party. He’s a member of the Labour party, so he knows a lot of people and people say that because he is working with us, people probably think that he is trying to push an agenda on our behalf.

TJ: What about [Tower Hamlets Labour party official] Humayun Kabir?

HR: I’m not aware that he is a member of IFE although we know him well.

TJ: But you just said to me that you don’t have members…?

HR: People who claim to be members, not a membership as such.

TJ: Hira is closer to IFE than Humayun, because Humayun is either a friend or a supporter, I don’t know.

HR: Abdal Ullah? He is not a member, he hasn’t been involved with IFE directly. I know that he has worked with some of us, who have worked with the LMC [London Muslim Centre] when it was constructed and in fact he was quite keen in getting some child care projects within it. Alibor, again, is someone within the community who is active in politics and we have associations with him, but he is far too busy with his politics to do anything else. Yes, so we know these people because we are very much involved in the community. We know most of the councillors. You can name all the councillors and I can tell you, yes we know them, and they’ve worked with us in one or another capacity because we are in the community.

TJ: You have people who are actively involved within the Labour party and you hope that they will do the work that you will be supportive of?

HR: We like people to be involved in the community, including politics. And we want the same for other people in the community to do the same. But that doesn’t mean there’s an organisational agenda as such.

TJ: What about Azad Ali?

HR: What about Azad Ali…?

TJ: Is he a member?

HR: Yeah, he’s a member.

TJ: Well, thank you…..I will return to put what you’ve said to the people who came to me.

HR: Listen, feel free to come to me directly. There are some people who are attributing far too much to IFE. It is true that we have been working with the community for a long time. I work in the London Metropolitan University and I am very much interested in education, but I make no secret of my work in the community to the university and there is work that we want to do. If it is hurting some people’s political agendas, this is not the intention: all we want to do is see that people are active in the community whatever they happen to be, including politicians.

Share this: Facebook & Twitter

Like this:

15 Responses

In a TV exchange with your friend, Andrew Gilligan, the New Statesman political editor Mehdi Hasan said the following of the groups you both are obsessed with:

“I happened to take part in a Sky News debate with Gilligan this morning…he chose not to respond to the comments that I cited from citizens’ groups and interfaith forums in east London, which have accused journalists like Gilligan (and Martin Bright) of misrepresenting supposedly “Islamist” groups such as the Islamic Forum of Europe and the East London Mosque.”

I’m not sure you’ve either read much of my blog or my previous work at the East London Advertiser, when I covered these issues more regularly, but let’s examine the “journalistic playbook”. Tell me, what would you do as a journalist if you were being told by very senior politicians in Tower Hamlets that their party was being infiltrated by a group of which they were wary? Would you ignore those conversations and write them off without any checks as the rants of those who were trying to push a certain agenda? Or would you put in calls to the people who were the subjects of those allegations, listen to what they had to say and challenge them where appropriate?

The people voicing those concerns to me were Muslims: some of them were politicians, most weren’t. Were they not allowed to express their worries to a journalist, in your view?

I didn’t see the Sky News exchange between Mehdi Hasan and Andrew Gilligan, so I will make no comment on the discussion. However, I’m not really sure of the strength of citing inter-faith forums to back up arguments because those groups tend to be self-selecting and by definition of a religious comradely bent. I’m not sure who they speak for, really. The Tower Hamlets Inter-Faith Forum is chaired by the admirable Alan Green, the vicar of St John on Bethnal Green, which like most other churches in the borough has a fairly small congregation. The main mover in the forum is, by far, the East London Mosque – whereas most of the population is, I’d guess, secular and not at all actively practising any religion. (In fact, I know of one one very senior vicar in Tower Hamlets who is concerned about what he believes is the top-heavy influence of the ELM).

As for the various headlines you highlight….in the pedantic interests of accuracy, I’m fairly sure they were articles in the Daily Express, not the Sunday Express for which I work. We are two separate titles, with two separate sets of staff and no reporting cross-over. I didn’t write any of those articles and my colleagues are well aware of my views on these issues. (Incidentally, “Immigrants bring MORE crime” was about migrants from Eastern Europe and not Muslims.)

Your comment that I think that Muslim groups are all fanatics is just stupid.

It is unfortunate that the climate that we are in stifles open discussion about the issues that cross cultural and religious boundaries. It is understandable that Muslims feel discriminated against, they are after all the communists of the 21st century, and have a right to think senator mcarthy is after them.

However, we cannot get away from the fact that the IFE have positioned themselves in a way where a significant proportion of people, particularly in Tower Hamlets, are “members”.

This can be in many forms from actively supporting and attending meetings events to “other” unclear ways. However, as long as they stay within the boundaries of the law, I take no issue.

For me (and many others), the problem lies in the IFE’s denial about the level of political influence they have. Let’s take the current Labour selection saga as an example. Lutfur Rahman denies any membership or “connection” to the IFE. Which might be true. HOWEVER, on the campaign trail, a significant proportion of people who sympathise with the IFE will be supporting Lutfur. Some of these people have never met him, many dint even know his views, yet he’s a hero. All I’m saying is, this pattern seems consistent with a lobby group asking it’s “audience” to back Lutfur.

Now, is there anything wrong with that? Unions have been doing it for years, aswell as other lobby groups.

The problem is, politics in Tower Hamlets (mostly at the fault of the current political class) is not transparent or consistent.

Finally, my point (eventually) is cut the crap. Ted’s interest in the IFE is consistent and legitimate. Do not convolute the argument. Never forget, too many peoole have died for the rights that we have. Man, woman, child, black, white, asian, christian, atheist, muslim.

He’s a man who is very quick to defend Islamist bigots, unless they say anything rude about his beloved Shia Islam. A case in point: this article in the Guardian in which he starts off by attacking the Quilliam Foundation, for pointing out that the Islam Channel broadcasts extremist hate preachers. Then, abruptly, he changes tack to lay into the Islam Channel because they also hosted a hate preacher who attacked his own sect!

Yes, but, having laid out your motives, forgive me if I take your reporting with a huge dullop of salt. Sounds more like a case of entrapment than a proper interview.

2. “I’m not sure you’ve either read much of my blog or my previous work at the East London Advertiser”

I know enough of your material to know that I know a bigot when I read one. Especially one that tries his very best to wrap his bigotry up in sugar-coated reasonableness to appear non-racist. It hasn’t worked with the EDL, it won’t work with you.

3. “Tell me, what would you do as a journalist if you were being told by very senior politicians in Tower Hamlets that their party was being infiltrated by a group of which they were wary? Would you ignore those conversations and write them off without any checks as the rants of those who were trying to push a certain agenda? Or would you put in calls to the people who were the subjects of those allegations, listen to what they had to say and challenge them where appropriate?”

If I were to do my job properly, I’d ensure I did my utmost to ensure the stories check out. Being an ace reporter knowing the deep down and dirty politics of Tower Hamlets, I’d make sure I wasn’t being the poodle of one faction, doing the dirty work against another.

What you have done is taken the allegations made by one faction, treated them as gospel, and then sought to check with those accused as a mere formality. In your mind, the groups you are pursuing are already guilty. Trial by Jeory. And you have played to peoples baser prejudices to get your point across.

4. “I didn’t see the Sky News exchange between Mehdi Hasan and Andrew Gilligan, so I will make no comment on the discussion”

5. “The people voicing those concerns to me were Muslims: some of them were politicians, most weren’t. Were they not allowed to express their worries to a journalist, in your view?”

Oh, a bit like saying “Some of my best friends are Muslims”. You know, in the current ‘ground zero mosque’ debate, their wheeling out Muslims too to uphold their racism, does that make it right?

They are fully entitled to express their opinions. As a journalist, I would imaging you would, however, scrutinise their views that little bit further.

Could it be, that they just happen to be supporters of a different faction? You and your friends use the politics of Bangladesh and paint it as a picture between Islamists and Secularists to prove your point. You look to these people as supposed paragons of secular, anti-Islamist sentiment. What utter tripe.

Either you are a useful tool, or you’re a bigot who are using them as a tool.

6. “I’m not really sure of the strength of citing inter-faith forums to back up arguments because those groups tend to be self-selecting and by definition of a religious comradely bent. I’m not sure who they speak for, really.”

So let me get this right, it OK not to back up the claims of the Muslims you use to mask your bigotry, but it is OK to question the validity of those interfaith bodies who defend the people you accuse of ‘Islamist’.

Note the hypocrisy?

7. “As for the various headlines you highlight….in the pedantic interests of accuracy, I’m fairly sure they were articles in the Daily Express, not the Sunday Express for which I work. We are two separate titles, with two separate sets of staff and no reporting cross-over. I didn’t write any of those articles and my colleagues are well aware of my views on these issues. (Incidentally, “Immigrants bring MORE crime” was about migrants from Eastern Europe and not Muslims.)”

Oh, so for the latter that is OK is it?

ACCURACY you say? So, if you don’t find the difference in personnel, staff and trustees between the East London Mosque and the Islamic Forum of Europe, why should I differentiate between the bigoted Daily Express, and it’s stablemate, the Sunday Express (or for that matter, the Daily Star)? Owned by the same man, with essentially the same bigoted outlook in all papers.

OK, supposed I gave you the benefit of the doubt, do you CONDEMN these statements? You and your friends expect the same things of Muslims, so will you condemn these racist headlines?

Oh, by the way, have learnt to be a bit more careful after YOUR newspaper was forced to apologise to the East London Mosque in March?

When a Government minister says that a certain group is infiltrating his party, that’s news regardless of motive. To say the interview, in which I put forward the views expressed to me, was “entrapment” underlines your stupidity.

“If I were to do my job properly, I’d ensure I did my utmost to ensure the stories check out. Being an ace reporter knowing the deep down and dirty politics of Tower Hamlets, I’d make sure I wasn’t being the poodle of one faction, doing the dirty work against another.” That interview was conducted in March 2009. While I wrote this article in June 2009, I only published the interview in full 17 months later. What do you think was happening in those intervening months?

“Oh, a bit like saying “Some of my best friends are Muslims”. You know, in the current ‘ground zero mosque’ debate, their wheeling out Muslims too to uphold their racism, does that make it right?” Firstly, it was Muslim sources coming to me to voice their concerns; they weren’t being “wheeled out”. See the difference. Greg, you’re not one of those patronising bigoted types who sees Muslims as a homogenous bloc are you? It may be a surprise, but they too have differing views and, hey, they’re also allowed to express them…even if they belong to factions formed on the basis of those views.

On the issue of headlines, I’m employed by Express Newspapers and I won’t enter a debate on this personal blog about them. As I said, those who know me are aware of my private views. My point about the migrants from Eastern Europe was clearly lost on you: you saw the word “immigrant” and read “Muslim”.

“Oh, by the way, have learnt to be a bit more careful after YOUR newspaper was forced to apologise to the East London Mosque in March?” Greg, read that link and tell me where the word “apologise” or “sorry” appears. Could it be (again) that you’re reading what you want to believe? Isn’t that what a bigot does?

It is more than obvious to people engaged with the politics of Tower Hamlets that Lutfur Rahman and his closest allies, colleagues and friends are associated, and somewhat influenced by leading members/supporters of the IFE. In Facebook, many Respect councillor candidates openly endorse Lutfur Rahman as the man they will be supporting. People like Hira have constantly been involved with negotiating positions in the council on behalf of Lutfur Rahman. Infact, I know for fact that a councillor friend was offered the position of Olympic Ambassador by Lutfur Rahman in the presence of Cllr Ohid in return for his support however, this was a few hours later reversed because Hira had promised former councillor Waiseul Islam the position. Basically, Lutfur wihtout question accepted Hira’s verdict with no compassion for the agreement he made with a fellow councillor. I will not name him here but I am sure that if Lutfur was to challenge my statement, he would find that extremely difficult to defend?
However, I feel this interview clarifies that persons such as [names deleted for legal reasons] who claim they are not members of IFE are infact members of IFE so far as their membership process identifies, described clearly by the interviewee. If this is not an issue, then why are they so hell-bent on deniying any form of association with them? The real danger now is that even if Lutfur fails to secure the party membership nomination on 4th September to become its first executive mayoral candidate, he could still go on to win as a Bangladeshi Muslim candidate against the Tories and Lib-Dems whom have both choosen white candidates. Respect would no doubt simply just put up a white paper candidate in order to avoid too much criticism. However, it Lutfur does not become a candidate, then we may see the return of [offensive terms description deleted] Abjol Miah who is as useless in council as the time taken to type his name!

Like others here I have no idea who you are but I would suspect that you are troll for IFE. What I would say to everyone is look at the evidence, deal with the entirety of it and not the details which is what deniers of all types do.

I am going to call you, Greg, an HDD. This a Holocaust Defence Denier. I will explain what that means. Pay attention. Those who deny the organised mass murder of the Jewish population of Europe always look for the most trivial inconsistency in the accounts of those who went through that terrible time and then survived.

What people like you Greg do is pick up on one, usually minor or insignificant detail, and then use that to attack and deny the whole. For instance, Jew haters like yourself, will take the evidence of two inmates of a camp on the same day in, say, a day in July 1943.

These camps were massive, heavily controled and segregated. What you are doing is the same as many deniers before you. Because the two survivors do not have the same recollection of a particular transport of Jews to be killed you will say it never happened.

Everything that Ted Jeory and Andrew Gilligan have written about IFE and Tower Hamlets is true and no amount of wriggling and squirming on your part will make it untrue.

I have challenged Ken Livingstone to call me Islamophobic so I could sue him, he hasn’t done it so far and won’t.

[…] a great deal of controversy. So when I interviewed Lutfur in March 2009 (at around the same time as my interview with IFE president Habibur Rahman), I asked him about it. Here’s the transcript of that part of our conversation: TJ: The […]